What are your favorite idea groups for blobbing now?

[bbqftw]

I use religious...

you play Christian only then...?

Practically none of the other religions besides Sunni actually can keep pace with conversion strength.

The bigger concern unless you turn idea group restrictions off is that going religious early delays your administrative to 3rd pick which is crazy stifling.

Even then you're looking at thousand more clicks and significantly worse economy in 1500-1600, especially on VH where you don't get free wars.

Does declaring offensively into a coalition remove the coalition war enthusiasm modifier? I can see it in that case working.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I would counter many people here, and say influence is not that useful. Of course it has everything to do with the hands you're dealt.

It is fairly simple to play until 1630 without any unmanagable coalitions forming, because when you get an impressive ally like France or Ottomans, no one will touch you, as long as you don't go too crazy, and split the AE on all your borders. Negates the AE bonus from INF

As for the vassal feeding strategy, once absolutism hit, you can easily get >80 absolutism by 1630. Now, coring costs are dirt cheap, even without RCC ideas, and it is way cheaper and much less time consuming to just core everything yourself. Not to mention the pain of dealing with AI's: 1) liberty desire 2) incompetence of AI to keep its realm together. It is during this time the bulk of your territorial expansion happens anyways.

I would nix influence.

Defensive + Religious + Quantity + Admin + w.e. you want. Stack military ideas for the rest of the game.

-50% unjustified demands and a more efficient bird --> paper mana conversion put influence in top 4 easily. The AE savings are gravy, same with useful diprep/extra relations slot (which DIP also gives and one should usually take both in SP). Absolutism reduces dipannex cost too, not just core cost. With enough modifiers annexing a 1000 development vassal takes < 15 years.

The main advantage is to give them all the OE > 100% rather than yourself. Their troops suck, and by extension so do their rebels. If you have >200% OE, you get rebel sentiment galore and get huge rebel stacks all over the world. If you give a client state 400% OE, it vomits out rebels of every type in short order...but all in one clumped area near that front and easily beaten.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves - Espionage is still in the game

In games where you don't need exploration, espionage is a respectable 7th idea group choice for the diplomat. Having 5 allows you to double improve + double annex while still declaring wars which is nice for QoL. Considering how hot garbage the expansion set is, I place espionage comfortably above it, despite that espionage isn't very good.

I use religious...

The handicaps he mentioned are real. You can pick anything, but to justify one option as superior to another you'd need to address the handicaps. Most religions can't keep up conversions with expansion pace, forcing unity policies to maintain absolutism and necessarily enduring more rebels than humanist.

Does declaring offensively into a coalition remove the coalition war enthusiasm modifier? I can see it in that case working.

Yes, there is no "coalition war" modifier if you declare on a coalition. Members are also not considered cobelligerent, despite that the pre-war screen says they will be.

This has been the case for years now and it's objectively bugged (I've reported it ~5 times or so) because the UI and what happens don't align. Regardless, unless it got stealth-changed in 1.23 (not likely) you can trivially break coalitions by setting an OPM as the war leader and assaulting it down to kill enthusiasm. This still costs time and is less optimal than avoiding the coalition via declaring all the wars/being too strong/chaining truces, but it's an option if your timing is off.

 

[herrhals]

you play Christian only then...?

Nope, current game as Ardabil Persia, I am Shia.
I can't fight wars fast enough to keep up with keeping OE at 100%. Absolutism at 100 since 1635. Got 5% admin efficiency from age bonus almost immediately.
Overflowing in all points, annexing vassals all the same w/o influence idea group. No exceptional monarchs, except one 5/5/6 ruler. Having +5 mana advisors helps a lot too.

Easily on pace for WC if I wanted.

 

[rinehime]

Annexation is always cheaper than coring because it factors in RCC. Bird mana is also less valuable than paper mana.

Huh? Vassal annexation/PU integration doesn't include RCC bonuses, only AdmEff.
Base territorial cores are cheaper than annexation in a total mana sense, but, like you point out, when considering paper>bird, annexation is comparable / cheaper.
For full/state cores, of course, annexation is almost certainly cheaper unless you've really stacked the RCC bonuses.

 

[Manic Eskimo]

Admin has certainly taken a hit. Not just because of mercs but also because there's a lot more money in the game there are less loans too. The other ideas are all pretty terrible. So the only ones you really want now are core reduction and tech reduction. For me I find it hard to pick anything else first because there is no standout choice. The others are all situational.

As someone else said further up the page picking religious first is going to slow you down as all the useful ideas are near the end. It just feels bad when you need more conversion strength but your first idea is an extra missionary and you don't actually get what you need until you've invested 1200 admin points. I have started taking it a bit more because of the bonus to the age of reformation. But I still regret it most of the time.

Usually I would go humanist as a second admin idea. No huge benefit to picking it first apart from situational and the reformation bonus. It's great mid to late game once you've got really big but not spectacular early.

Expansion gets a really bad rap imo. People say it's the worst idea group, that's laughable. Only one of the ideas is actually bad, recruitment time. It's just none of them are great, must have ideas like coring cost tech reduction. It's definitely a situational pick.

Innovative is kind of situational if you're really struggling for admin points. Just invest up to the 3rd idea and don't bother getting the rest. I tried it recently and was impressed and surprised.

Economic if you're economy is really really bad and not likely to get better. With more money in the game you need this even less. Only reason to get it for me would be inflation reduction. But you have an advisor for that.

So for me there's no great reason not to pick admin first in most expansion games.

 

[qwertzuiop]

I get bored picking, and even planning on picking, the same idea line up every time. How can you stand to play the game over and over again knowing you are going to pick the same idea line-up every time. Sure to go WC you seem to have follow a script pretty much, but I enjoy trying to grow and overcome obstacles while picking "the lumps of coal".

Well you don't really pick the same ideas every time (I agree that would be boring). It's more about picking something out of a set of useful ideas according to your strategy while avoiding the idea groups that are not useful. It doesn't have to be planned out from start to finish. I don't like idea groups that offer almost nothing but I would consider taking idea groups that are not optimal if they offer something fun and unique, like for example Trade + Innovative if I wanted to get interest down to the minimum or picking Economic along with Exploration to maximize tariffs.

To me it would be boring to randomly pick bad idea groups because they have a lower impact on the game which also means they aren't as much fun.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Expansion is naval and maritime tier, arguably lower. "Never take this" sums it up fine and works for SP and MP. It's that degree of trash. At least in MP maybe someone goes a naval group and gouges ship quality with cover from allies to completely own the water + force opponents to respect landings/faster travel.

Saying "only one idea is bad, none are great" is not helpful. No idea group gives you bad stuff. The terrible groups are there because there is always or virtually always a better selection available.

There is never a valid optimal time to select expansion over administrative, one of religious/humanist, or even economic/innovative outside of edge scenarios involving achievements or special goals. For MP it's junk, and for SP blobbing it's comical to even consider it.

 

[El_Cid_]

I've been toying with Innovative since CoC.

And before I start getting flamed by people... you play enough of this game and eventually picking the same idea groups gets boring so that was part of the reason I went Influence>Innovative on a discontinued Mamluk run.

The idea was to access cheap level 5 advisors relatively early in the game. I kinda goofed up though because I totally tanked diplo tech which gave me tonnes of corruption and stifled my economy so I wasn't able to run level 5 guys as early as I wanted to. I'd like to give it another try though.

 

[HansBaer]

Derailing the topic a bit I just want to give some ideas for alternatives to max blobbing:
For a tall game in Europe (where mps are abundant), I really like taking economy first because the -interest, decreased building cost and increased tax really help your economy in the beginning. Brandenburg with admin focus from day 1 for example or any republic. For rotw tallish games innovative first can be really good.
Those ideas also become far from useless in midgame because they will help you develope your provinces. Then you will combine them with offensive and quality and get those uber policies to beat up countries 10x your size and 5x your development. This can be just as engaging and fun as an expansionist game.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I've been toying with Innovative since CoC.

And before I start getting flamed by people... you play enough of this game and eventually picking the same idea groups gets boring so that was part of the reason I went Influence>Innovative on a discontinued Mamluk run.

The idea was to access cheap level 5 advisors relatively early in the game. I kinda goofed up though because I totally tanked diplo tech which gave me tonnes of corruption and stifled my economy so I wasn't able to run level 5 guys as early as I wanted to. I'd like to give it another try though.

Estate adviser discount stacks with innovative so it's a lot less bad than it used to be for SP. It's hard to quantify exactly the variance in MP income from faster adviser tier. I guess you need less neighbor bonus to hit the 30 point floor and vault forward too, but haven't really tried that much with other sources of -tech cost.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You're arguing a strawman of your own making.

What I quoted is what you said, which is not how strawmen work. I was addressing that specific part of your argument in support of expansion. We don't disagree on administrative, so there was no point in addressing that.

You have not actually refuted the notion that expansion is virtually never an optimal pick when trying to improve your nation's position. Situations that make it optimal do not exist under normal conditions, and that is in contrast to other admin groups and to most other groups in the game. Since it is among the least-viable choices in the game on average, the notion that it belongs anywhere but bottom tier does not hold up.

I'm not just saying to pick admin over it. I'm saying it is consistently worse than any other ADM group you could pick in everything but edge cases.

Try to work on your attitude kid you come off as really obnoxious.

What's up with that? It's not like I want expansion to be terrible, that's just the reality for now. No need to make it personal.

 

[Less2]

Admin's goodness had next to nothing to do with mercs to begin with. I don't think anything is substantially affected there, still a godly group.

IMO the big change is Professionalism, which is almost a military ideagroup on its own, making a midgame military group even less desirable for SP. Even with fairly extensive merc usage as long as you don't get stack wiped you'll be way ahead of the AI and have a half mil ideagroup advantage. +20% siege ability combined with cheap generals to roll 3+ siege pips even with no bonuses/mediocre AT is nuts for your ability to take down forts. I'm sure the highest level WC players can say that Professionalism isn't worth the huge rate at which they need to merc up for fast expansion but at least for me I feel like a fairly accomplished blobber to have 2200 development as Ethiopia near the end of the 16th century and even with half my army merc I'm sitting at 55% Professionalism while no AI major comes close except France, which I attribute to the AI getting stack wiped or disbanding and re-raising mercs.

 

[Virupaksha]

Military ideas are a lot more interesting than admin and diplo.

Admin goes admin then humanist. There are advocates for religious but I don't see it.

Diplo takes two of diplo, influence and exploration. Still there is some measure of choice.

Military ideas are much more even (though I find it hard to get away from quantity). Shame they wont get taken til fifth group if then?

 

[Northernwwater]

You have not actually refuted the notion that expansion is virtually never an optimal pick when trying to improve your nation's position.

Your use of optimal makes it a strawman. Optimal is what you want it to be.

 

[Manic Eskimo]

What I quoted is what you said, which is not how strawmen work. I was addressing that specific part of your argument in support of expansion. We don't disagree on administrative, so there was no point in addressing that.

You have not actually refuted the notion that expansion is virtually never an optimal pick when trying to improve your nation's position. Situations that make it optimal do not exist under normal conditions, and that is in contrast to other admin groups and to most other groups in the game. Since it is among the least-viable choices in the game on average, the notion that it belongs anywhere but bottom tier does not hold up.

I'm not just saying to pick admin over it. I'm saying it is consistently worse than any other ADM group you could pick in everything but edge cases.

You misrepresented my argument to suit your own purpose that's how strawmen work, At no point did I say "you should pick expansion first" or that it would be optimal. You're making things up. My point was that people are hyperbolically critical of expansion. That's all.

You want a situational scenario? Portugal. Strategy could be to colonize as quickly as possible to start work on India and East Asia. Pick expo/expa get there much quicker. In that time admin will not have done much for you. But expansion would have done more. It lets you compete with Spain in the Americas while also going east and you get an extra merchant early which is always nice. Get admin as a second idea when you're really ready to start coring in the mid game. That may not be an optimal strategy but it's one that someone might try. Again I never said it was optimal. Especially not first. That is in your head.

If you're talking about picking it up later I have in the past, quite a long time in the past taken it as Russia. Because you don't need anything but the single colonist and the other stuff is all useful.

I can't think of a single time I've picked expansion and regretted it the same way I have with religious, which seems to be every time since the nerf. Try to be a bit more open minded. I mean when's the last time you even tried it to test it? Probably not since it got nerfed right? It's not as terrible as you make out.

What's up with that? It's not like I want expansion to be terrible, that's just the reality for now. No need to make it personal.

You are the one who made it personal with your needless aggression. I just wanted to have a discussion calmly and rationally you seemed to be looking for a fight.

 

[Amadeu of Savoy]

You want a situational scenario? Portugal. Strategy could be to colonize as quickly as possible to start work on India and East Asia. Pick expo/expa get there much quicker.

Yeah, that's what I did in my current Portugal game: Exploration/Expansion for a jump-start in colonization. Obviously not a great strategy for blobbing.

 

[Northernwwater]

Yeah, that's what I did in my current Portugal game: Exploration/Expansion for a jump-start in colonization. Obviously not a great strategy for blobbing.

I pick Expansion when I want to colonize as Hamburg. I steal maps and hence don't need an explorer or a conquistador, and since my goal is not to compete in colonization, but to just get footholds and then take already existing colonies.

 

[Badesumofu]

I pick Expansion when I want to colonize as Hamburg. I steal maps and hence don't need an explorer or a conquistador, and since my goal is not to compete in colonization, but to just get footholds and then take already existing colonies.

You could do that with just the first two ideas in Exploration and spend your ADM on something more useful.

You want a situational scenario? Portugal. Strategy could be to colonize as quickly as possible to start work on India and East Asia. Pick expo/expa get there much quicker. In that time admin will not have done much for you. But expansion would have done more. It lets you compete with Spain in the Americas while also going east and you get an extra merchant early which is always nice. Get admin as a second idea when you're really ready to start coring in the mid game. That may not be an optimal strategy but it's one that someone might try. Again I never said it was optimal. Especially not first. That is in your head.

This is a thread about comparing idea groups for their relative power. If the best defence of Expansion you can come up with is 'there exists a sub-optimal strategy that includes it', then maybe it's time to admit that it is a garbage idea group.

 

[Badesumofu]

As for the vassal feeding strategy, once absolutism hit, you can easily get >80 absolutism by 1630. Now, coring costs are dirt cheap, even without RCC ideas, and it is way cheaper and much less time consuming to just core everything yourself. Not to mention the pain of dealing with AI's: 1) liberty desire 2) incompetence of AI to keep its realm together. It is during this time the bulk of your territorial expansion happens anyways.

Absolutism reduces integration costs as well, you realise? I mean, you can core everything yourself without using vassals, but you can do it a lot faster if you do use vassals. If your point is that you just can't be bothered dealing with them, then okay sure, I guess. It's not an optimal strategy, though.

Religious is really marginal. Dues Vult is mostly a convenience. And really, if you aren't integrating vassals then what does it even matter if you save a few diplo points on unjustified? If you are using vassals then you're taking Influence which with Despotic gives you a total of -60% unjustified on all wars. Assuming you've targeted claims on the highest dev provinces and gotten your rivaling right you're probably eliminating at least half of the remaining potential unjustified demands costs. Playing with Religious over Humanist means converting everything and even with Religious that is going to be extremely problematic for most religions. Very marginal.

Influence is gold for any game in which you aim to expand to any serious extent.

 

[Badesumofu]

Excuse me but what event are you talking about?

There is an army professionalism event called 'Infiltration of ____'. It gives one of your neighbors 5 professionalism if they take it. It gives you 75 spy network on them. It fires very frequently once you build high professionalism and have a ton of neighbors.